
What kind of economy produces the highest adolescent suicide rate? Ours
The latest Unicef Innocenti Report Card 19: Fragile Gains – Child Wellbeing at Risk in an Unpredictable World ranks Aotearoa 32nd out of 36 wealthy countries for overall child wellbeing. We are rock bottom for child and youth mental health, with the highest youth suicide rate among EU and OECD countries. It is a competition no one wants to win.
The Unicef rankings are a wake-up call, but they're not surprising. They reflect choices. Political ones. This isn't just theory for me. In my former role as executive officer of Child Poverty Action Group, I saw firsthand how political decisions shape lives. In that role I worked with advocates, communities and academics pushing for systemic change. A core part of that work involved advocating for long-term solutions, instead of just charity. It was about improving systems that were never designed with the dignity and wellbeing of people in mind.
It is important, necessary work. But what has become increasingly clear to me is, if we really want to fix poverty, if we want children to flourish, we have to go as far upstream as we can. We have to radically improve the economic system that underpins it all.
Because the truth is, our current system is working exactly as it was designed to, just not for the greater good of everyone.
As Toby Manhire's podcast series Juggernaut shows, neoliberalism, the dominant economic system we live under, was deliberately designed to give more power to the market: deregulating corporations and privatising the public. And our politicians really went for it. Taxes were overhauled and welfare budgets were slashed. We were told that economic gains would trickle down.
Instead, the approach devalued our own people and created rampant wealth inequality. As Max Rashbrooke details, New Zealand had the biggest increase in income disparity in the developed world between 1985 and 2005. And it was during the 1980s and 1990s that we saw an upward trend in our overall suicide death rate. Child poverty, inequality and mental health crises aren't bugs, they are features of the system.
Today, young people face a future that feels increasingly out of reach. Home ownership is slipping away, tertiary education is expensive, and the climate crisis looms large. They're being told, implicitly or explicitly, to expect a lower quality of life than their parents. This isn't the natural way of things and it demands a serious and future-focused response from our politicians.
Budget 2025 is around the corner, and it will tell us, once again, what our leaders value. It will show us if our decision-makers are choosing to prioritise what really matters: real support for mental health, liveable incomes, access to quality housing and education, and the wellbeing of our communities.
So, what would I like to see in the government's budget? Intergenerational thinking.
Yes, I want to see increased funding for youth mental health services, but if we are truly to go to the root cause of the problem, the budget would include a commitment to public housing and housing affordability so that every child in Aotearoa can grow up in a stable housing environment. Housing instability is more than just a roof issue, it's a stress factory for families. Constant moves can chip away at a child's sense of community, identity and safety.
It would include a commitment to real, sustained action on climate change. Not just vague targets, but serious investment in reducing emissions. Rewiring Aotearoa and Recloaking Papatūānuku are two examples of climate action that actually save money. The mental toll of living through climate anxiety is real, especially for young people who are increasingly aware that the world they're inheriting is in crisis. A future-focused budget would treat the climate crisis not as tomorrow's problem, but as today's emergency, and invest accordingly.
It would include more examples of community wealth building in action. 'Community wealth building' might sound like jargon, but it's working overseas to grow jobs and prosperity. At its heart, it's a simple idea: keep jobs, resources and decision-making in local hands. One of the best examples of this was the earlier version of the healthy school lunch programme, a model that created local jobs, supported small businesses, and strengthened communities.
Instead of funnelling money to distant, multinational corporations, this approach helps keep wealth circulating locally. And it's not just smart economics, it's intergenerational thinking. By strengthening the social and economic fabric now, we create the conditions for young people to thrive in the decades ahead.
The budget should also include new metrics of success. We have to ask ourselves what the purpose of the economy actually is, and what metrics we should be using to measure it? In Aotearoa, we still measure success by how fast GDP grows. But did you know that oil spills and car crashes grow GDP? While unpaid care isn't counted?
But GDP doesn't tell us if children are fed, if they feel safe, if they can access mental health support when they're struggling. It doesn't tell us if policies help people live with dignity and connection. What gets measured gets managed, and we're measuring the wrong things.
A wellbeing economy flips the script. It doesn't ask 'how fast is GDP growing?' but 'is our economy delivering what people and the planet need to thrive?' It demands new measures of success, ones that actually tell us if what we are doing counts.
Those indicators might include livable incomes, access to housing, health and education; and an environment that can support future generations. The things that truly show whether we're on the right path, both for our generation and for those to come.
We can make this shift, but it demands courage and genuine leadership to break away from a failing status quo. Imagine a future where we lead not in youth suicide statistics, but in pioneering an economy designed around wellbeing and long-term impact.

Try Our AI Features
Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:
Comments
No comments yet...
Related Articles


NZ Herald
a day ago
- NZ Herald
Diplomats who have been in the room give their insight on who might prevail in Alaska
The Telegraph has spoken to a host of former officials and diplomats who have first-hand experience dealing with both the Russian and American presidents. Trump characterised his goals for the high-stakes meeting as an opportunity to stare into his Russian counterpart's eyes to judge his plan to end the war in Ukraine. 'I'm going to see what he has in mind,' the US President told reporters. 'I may leave and say good luck, and that'll be the end,' he added. 'Probably in the first two minutes I'll know exactly whether or not a deal can get done.' If he is prepared to walk away at the slightest demonstration that Putin isn't ready to end the war – Zelenskyy says Russia is gearing up for more conflict – then what does Trump want? It has long been thought that he is desperate for a Nobel Peace Prize and has a particular grudge against President Barack Obama for being decorated only eight months into his first term. The Norwegian Nobel Committee cited Obama's 'extraordinary efforts to strengthen international diplomacy and co-operation between peoples', which seemed to be more about Obama's promise as an international leader than his actual accomplishments. Trump is the self-styled 'president of peace'. 'As president, he has brokered peace between Azerbaijan and Armenia, Cambodia and Thailand, Israel and Iran, Rwanda and the Democratic Republic of the Congo, India and Pakistan, Egypt and Ethiopia, Serbia and Kosovo, and with the Abraham Accords,' the White House said. 'Trump and certainly [JD] Vance, they don't care about the future of Ukraine particularly,' Anthony Gardener, who served as Obama's US Ambassador to the EU, said. 'I'm convinced Trump does want to position himself as the person who, quote, unquote, brought a sort of form of peace to get a Nobel Peace Prize,' Gardener added. Ending the bloodshed in Ukraine could do that. Others say he's looking for yet another deal to sell as a demonstration of business acumen. There are significant rare earth mineral deposits in eastern Ukraine. That territory is on the table, and Trump has already made a play for it by signing an agreement with Zelenskyy to be able to mine it. 'Trump wants to bag a win … period,' Gardener said. In his office in the Kremlin, where Putin will be preparing for his meeting with Trump, sits a bust of Catherine the Great. The significance of the monument should not be lost. As Russia's longest-serving female monarch, Catherine dragged the country into the 18th century and during her reign, doubled the size of its empire. David Liddington, a former deputy prime minister, said Putin also compares himself to Peter the Great, 'somebody who is going to restore Russia's greatness and grow Russia's territory, at least its effective empire'. And Putin is likely to double down on his positions, in an attempt to at least cement his control over the Ukrainian territory already seized by his invasion forces. He will leave little of the planning up to his aides, who are mostly believed to be yes men there for affirmation rather than assistance. 'President Putin is secretive, well-scripted and always eager to press an argument that reaffirms his positions rather than his willingness to settle. He reflects the attitudes of someone who's familiar with power play, intelligence and security considerations, not the transactional, commercial kind of negotiation playbook,' Margaritis Schinas, a former European Commission vice-president, said. According to Bobby McDonagh, a former Irish ambassador to the UK, Italy and EU, Putin is 'utterly predictable'. 'He will relentlessly and ruthlessly pursue his very narrowly defined idea of Russian interests,' McDonagh added. Those who have been in the room before say the Russian President will likely try to corner his American counterpart by demanding that the structure of their meeting plays out in a specific fashion. 'He prefers meetings structured in two parts: first, with delegations and interpreters that mainly serve as an audience to listen to his position on a particular subject, usually peppered with aggressive comments on those who think otherwise; then, a more closed – usually tete a tete – discussion of principals where he may show some margin of openness,' Schinas said. It is in the latter section of the meeting in which Putin will try to hammer home any wriggle room he has made for himself. 'Putin will keep his eye on the strategic prize. He will look for opportunities to lessen the economic pressure on Russia and the Russian economy,' Liddington said. The UK Foreign, Commonwealth and Development Office estimates that sanctions on Russia have deprived the Russian state of at least £333 billion ($755b) in war funds between February 2022 and June 2025. Any easing would give Putin a significant win. John Bolton, Trump's former national security adviser, told the Telegraph that Putin will use his KGB skills to manipulate the US President. 'That's one reason why Putin really did not want Zelenskyy or the Europeans there. He doesn't want Trump to be distracted with all these other players,' Bolton said. 'Putin will try to get Trump back into feeling that they're friends again. I think Trump has been disappointed that his friend, over the first six months of the Administration, has not helped him reach this deal.' According to Bolton, Putin has 'manipulated Trump on Ukraine really right from the beginning of the Administration, but back before the disaster with Zelenskyy in the Oval Office'. The Russian President is 'going to try and get Trump back on side', Bolton said, adding: 'He's got to work fast'. 'The outcome will depend entirely on whether Trump resists Putin's known and entirely unacceptable demands,' McDonagh added. He was referring to a stripped-back Ukrainian Army, no prospect of them joining Nato, and the recognition of Russian sovereignty over the Ukrainian regions of Crimea, Donetsk, Luhansk, Zaporizhzhia and Kherson. The US President is much happier to consult with advisers on his positions in the meeting, but those don't bode well for Ukraine. Tulsi Gabbard, his intelligence chief, is known to not care much for Kyiv. Vance and Pete Hegseth, the Defence Secretary, have vocalised the need for Ukraine to surrender territory. 'He likes to be surrounded by his team and advisers, allowing them space for contributions, but under no circumstances margin for decision,' Schinas said. This means the US President is unlikely to listen to the European leaders, including Keir Starmer, who were to hold talks with him overnight. There is one hope among the European and Ukrainian onlookers ahead of the summit. Is Trump prepared to let himself be embarrassed at the hands of Putin? Will he attempt to emulate Ronald Reagan, the former US president credited for the invention of 'Make America Great Again'? Sir Julian King, Britain's last-ever European Commissioner, said: 'You can get unexpected outcomes'. 'Reagan at Reykjavik blindsided his allies,' he said, referring to the 1986 summit between the US president and Mikhail Gorbachev which ushered in the end of the Cold War. 'But as they meet for the first time in years, with Putin's maximalist negotiating and Trump's unpredictability, anything could happen. 'The one potential saving grace, Trump won't want to come out looking like a chump,' he concluded.


NZ Herald
2 days ago
- NZ Herald
NCEA's demise is a lesson in failed educational policy
New Zealand students ranked above the OECD average in maths, reading and science literacy in the 2022 Pisa (Programme for International Student Assessment) report. But there has been a decline in scores across all three subjects in the last 20 years. We should not move on from the National Certificate of Educational Achievement (NCEA) without asking how it happened and why we persisted with a scheme so obviously flawed. If I tell you Trevor Mallard was the Minister of Education in 2002 when the NCEA was implemented, you may think no further explanation is needed. When he was Speaker of the House, Mallard responded to protesters coming to Parliament by turning on the sprinklers and playing Barry Manilow songs over the public address system. But, in fairness, the NCEA was not his idea. I was in Parliament when it was promoted. It was his associate minister, Steve Maharey, by profession a sociology lecturer, who drove it through. Maharey was a true believer in 'cognitive learning', what he called 'personalised learning', more commonly known as 'pupil-led learning': the notion that children learn by discovering knowledge for themselves rather than being directly taught. We do learn from experience and finding out information is an important skill. But to master any worthwhile subject, we must first be taught essential foundation knowledge. A simple example: to write coherently, one must know grammar. You cannot do chemistry without being taught the periodic table, or mathematics without learning times tables. The NCEA allowed pupils to choose to skip learning challenging content essential for subject knowledge in favour of collecting soft credits. It is also unfair to blame only Maharey. In the British comedy Yes Minister, politicians come and go while the real power lies with senior civil servants. So too in New Zealand. The NCEA was the creation of senior bureaucrats in the Ministry of Education. It is a department that has promoted a string of fads, from open-plan classrooms, 'look-and-guess' reading and that built schools so badly designed they have had to be demolished. The ministry has created a school system where absenteeism is rife. Really big mistakes are usually made by clever people. Stupid people are rarely able to make a big mistake. Those promoting pupil-led learning were clever, articulate and convinced that they knew best. What they claimed is superficially attractive. Rote learning can crush creativity, but the alternative they imposed was worse. Act MP Deborah Coddington summed up our view at the time: 'One of the most dangerous experiments ever foisted on New Zealand children.' John Morris, Auckland Grammar headmaster, correctly predicted that the NCEA would mean 'the dumbing-down of academic standards'. Some New Zealand schools have never adopted pupil-led learning, opting for the Cambridge exam instead. National's then education spokesman Sir Bill English warned that if problems weren't fixed, 'NCEA will lose credibility'. This belief that it just needed a few tweaks led the Key Government into continuing with a system that was flawed. The flaws were visible from the start. Students and schools gamed the system. In 2004, Cambridge High School claimed a 100% NCEA pass rate by giving pupils credits for picking up litter. In 2013, nearly 25% of internal assessments were marked incorrectly, yet the credits still counted toward NCEA grades. In 2017 then Education Minister Chris Hipkins announced a review of the NCEA. The Government launched a trial of of new NCEA literacy and numeracy tests in 2022. The results were shocking. More than 40% of students failed at least one test in the June 2023 exams. The Herald has reported that Labour's current education spokeswoman, Willow-Jean Prime, didn't respond to NCEA meeting offers. By contrast, in just 18 months, Education Minister Erica Stanford has announced the end of the NCEA and its replacement with externally marked exams. Critics complain this will mean teachers 'teaching to the test'. Exactly. Exams will result in teacher-led learning. Pupils being taught reading, writing and arithmetic, essential for passing exams. For two decades, NCEA's designers insisted their system was the future. The future has arrived, and it has failed. The real lesson is not just that the NCEA must go, but that the political class must never again be permitted to impose unproven ideology-driven experiments on our children.


NZ Herald
3 days ago
- NZ Herald
‘Concessions do not persuade a killer' - Zelenskyy warns against capitulating to Russia's demands
'This is really a feel-out meeting a little bit,' Trump told reporters at the White House. 'We're going to see what he has in mind and if it's a fair deal, I'll reveal it to the European Union leaders and to Nato leaders and also to President Zelenskyy,' Trump said. 'I may say - lots of luck, keep fighting. Or I may say, we can make a deal.' Trump insists on swaps Zelenskyy has ruled out ceding territory seized by force. Trump - who publicly berated Zelenskyy at a White House meeting in February - said he was a 'little bothered' by Zelensky's stance and insisted land swaps would need to take place. 'There'll be some swapping, there'll be some changes in land,' he said. But Trump said he would also tell Putin that 'you've got to end this war'. German Chancellor Friedrich Merz has invited the French, British and other European leaders and the EU and Nato chiefs to virtual talks. Merz's office said today that the video conference in various rounds of talks would discuss 'further options to exert pressure on Russia' and 'preparation of possible peace negotiations and related issues of territorial claims and security'. EU foreign ministers met in Brussels today with Ukrainian Foreign Minister Andrii Sybiha and also examined imposing a 19th package of sanctions on Russia since the invasion. Until Russia agrees to a 'full and unconditional ceasefire, we should not even discuss any concessions', EU foreign policy chief Kaja Kallas said after the talks. 'It has never worked in the past with Russia, and will not work with Putin today.' Zelenskyy again warned against capitulating to Putin's demands. 'Russia refuses to stop the killings, and therefore must not receive any rewards or benefits. And this is not just a moral position - it is a rational one,' Zelenskyy wrote in a statement published on social media. 'Concessions do not persuade a killer,' he added. Question on Zelensky role Asked yesterday on CNN if Zelenskyy could be present at the Alaska summit, US Ambassador to Nato Matthew Whitaker responded, 'Yes, I certainly think it's possible'. Trump, asked today about inviting Zelenskyy to Alaska, suggested the Ukrainian leader would be involved in talks at a future date. 'I'll be there if they need, but I want to have a meeting set up between the two leaders,' he said. It remains unclear if Putin would accept a meeting with Zelenskyy, who has publicly dared him to negotiate. As a prerequisite to a peace settlement, the Kremlin has demanded Kyiv pull its forces out of several regions claimed by Moscow and embrace sweeping demands - including committing to being a neutral state excluded from Nato and shunning US and European military support. Both sides have stepped up aerial assaults, with Ukraine claiming to have hit a facility that produces missile components in Russia's Nizhny Novgorod region. Local authorities said one person died in the attack and two were wounded. Russia's Defence Ministry said its forces had captured the village of Fedorivka, in eastern Ukraine's Donetsk region. -Agence France-Presse